If Obama Ordered A General Confiscation of Firearms, Would You Comply?

[rightwinger]

Like i said before, that's one ridiculous asshole. Are there more?

Hundreds of Thousands and Millions of us, all across the country. Many in the Law Enforcement and Military communities.

Millions that would go on a shooting spree if a law they didnt agree with was passed?

I find it amusing....

Most Americans if asked what they would do if the government came to take their house would reply .......get a lawyer, call my congressman, go to the press.....peaceful protest

If you ask gun nuts what they would do if someone tried to take their gun......I'd kill em

 

[rightwinger]

Worked DoD for 35 years

Know enough about the value of modern weapons, training, tactics and command structure

How much of that do you have?

I've studied Scipio, Julius, Rommel. Jackson, Manstein, Patton, Alexander, Cornwallace and Washington, and others.

You?

Wow...all that and you think a bunch of rednecks could defeat the Obama squad?

You don't book learn very well

You think the American people are a bunch of crackers?

Those who think the gubmint is going to come and take their guns are

Nonsense. No gun owners think the government is going to come and take their guns.

It's elements of the current government who in wishful thinking think they're going to come and take the guns.

Who started this thread?

Oh...it was you

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I've studied Scipio, Julius, Rommel. Jackson, Manstein, Patton, Alexander, Cornwallace and Washington, and others.

You?

Wow...all that and you think a bunch of rednecks could defeat the Obama squad?

You don't book learn very well

You think the American people are a bunch of crackers?

Those who think the gubmint is going to come and take their guns are

Nonsense. No gun owners think the government is going to come and take their guns.

It's elements of the current government who in wishful thinking think they're going to come and take the guns.

Who started this thread?

Oh...it was you

Indeed, but it was the Democrats who brought up the ridiculous idea of general confiscation in the first place.



She made that statement in 1995. Of course, she carried a gun.

Then the Americans came out of their usual siesta and stomped gun control to a bloody smear.

Consider 2A recognition state by state in 1995, and now. Gun control is a dead issue.

 

[BULLDOG]

Nope, if Ears wants ours he can come personalty and attempt to take them

You would cower before the Obama confiscation squads

What else could you do?

Any such "confiscation squads" would find themselves heavily outnumbered and outgunned within just a few days.

By the same massive crowd that was supposed to take over Washington?

So poodle...do you still think the guns were legal?
You ran off so fast I never got an answer...

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

 

[BULLDOG]

You would cower before the Obama confiscation squads

What else could you do?

Any such "confiscation squads" would find themselves heavily outnumbered and outgunned within just a few days.

Hardly

Your paltry weapons would pale in comparison to modern weapons and tactics. The Obama squad would have you shitting yourself in minutes

Shock and Awe anyone?

Silly boy. If even a third of gun owners resisted, they would outnumber total military personnel available including reserves by 20-1, including a large percentage with military experience.

Now explain why you think local police departments, much less the military, would support such a dictatorial move by Obama when it is safe to say a minimum of two-thirds of each group support the Constitution, and while their own family members are on the firing line?

You have little understanding of modern military force or tactics.
Untrained, isolated gun owners without leadership or communications are just targets for the Obama squad. Got helicopters? tanks?
After a few dozen are killed, the rest of you will come begging saying how sorry you are

Sorry Idiot but most people who own guns are not plotting to fight the government

You really are delusional go take your meds

That's the reason the gun nuts ALWAYS claim they NEED so many guns.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Nope, if Ears wants ours he can come personalty and attempt to take them

You would cower before the Obama confiscation squads

What else could you do?

Any such "confiscation squads" would find themselves heavily outnumbered and outgunned within just a few days.

By the same massive crowd that was supposed to take over Washington?

So poodle...do you still think the guns were legal?
You ran off so fast I never got an answer...

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

 

[rightwinger]

Wow...all that and you think a bunch of rednecks could defeat the Obama squad?

You don't book learn very well

You think the American people are a bunch of crackers?

Those who think the gubmint is going to come and take their guns are

Nonsense. No gun owners think the government is going to come and take their guns.

It's elements of the current government who in wishful thinking think they're going to come and take the guns.

Who started this thread?

Oh...it was you

Indeed, but it was the Democrats who brought up the ridiculous idea of general confiscation in the first place.



She made that statement in 1995. Of course, she carried a gun.

Then the Americans came out of their usual siesta and stomped gun control to a bloody smear.

Consider 2A recognition state by state in 1995, and now. Gun control is a dead issue.

Of course Feinsten witnessed Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk gunned down by a nutjob with a gun and an attitude

Trying to prevent it from happening again has been her obsessin in politics. Too bad other Senators don't give a shit when people die

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You think the American people are a bunch of crackers?

Those who think the gubmint is going to come and take their guns are

Nonsense. No gun owners think the government is going to come and take their guns.

It's elements of the current government who in wishful thinking think they're going to come and take the guns.

Who started this thread?

Oh...it was you

Indeed, but it was the Democrats who brought up the ridiculous idea of general confiscation in the first place.



She made that statement in 1995. Of course, she carried a gun.

Then the Americans came out of their usual siesta and stomped gun control to a bloody smear.

Consider 2A recognition state by state in 1995, and now. Gun control is a dead issue.

Of course Feinsten witnessed Mayor Moscone and Harvey Milk gunned down by a nutjob with a gun and an attitude

Trying to prevent it from happening again has been her obsessin in politics. Too bad other Senators don't give a shit when people die

Whats really sad is the president of the United States importing muslim terrorist.

 

[BULLDOG]

You would cower before the Obama confiscation squads

What else could you do?

Any such "confiscation squads" would find themselves heavily outnumbered and outgunned within just a few days.

By the same massive crowd that was supposed to take over Washington?

So poodle...do you still think the guns were legal?
You ran off so fast I never got an answer...

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Any such "confiscation squads" would find themselves heavily outnumbered and outgunned within just a few days.

By the same massive crowd that was supposed to take over Washington?

So poodle...do you still think the guns were legal?
You ran off so fast I never got an answer...

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

 

[BULLDOG]

By the same massive crowd that was supposed to take over Washington?

So poodle...do you still think the guns were legal?
You ran off so fast I never got an answer...

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

Frequently Asked Questions | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General
Are large-capacity magazines legal?

• 
  Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California. However, continued possession of large-capacity magazines that you owned in California prior to January 1, 2000, is legal provided you are not otherwise prohibited. A person prohibited from possessing firearms is also prohibited from owning or possessing any magazines or ammunition.
  
  (Pen. Code, §§16150, subd. (b), 30305, 32310.)
  

Since magazines usually have no serial number, and there was no requirement for record keeping on the sale of magazines, it is impossible to tell how old a magazine is, or when it was bought.

 

[Pop23]

If I owned one, and uniformed officers showed up, knew I owned one and demanded it, yes. Cops aren't my enemies. But short of them standing there hands out waiting, I'd try and come up with an alternative. Claim it was stolen, file a false report n everything.

I AM a gun owner, and have great respect for LEOs. However, ANY LEO who shows up at my home with the intent of unConstitutional actions may as well be wearing the Soviet hammer and sickle on their badges and will be treated as such.

That's the thing... for this scenario to be remotely plausible an outright repeal or at least massive modification of the 2nd amendment would have to be passed.

So the question should be would you surrender your guns in a legal collection or would you choose to break the law?

Again, it's a stupid question.

There would be enough people that would not that the carnage would be so great that every police officer would resign or back the publics right to ownership.

And if you think the military would get involved you are equally lacking reality.

The military would have the White House surrounded so fast it would make your head spin.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So poodle...do you still think the guns were legal?
You ran off so fast I never got an answer...

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

Frequently Asked Questions | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General
Are large-capacity magazines legal?

• 
  Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California. However, continued possession of large-capacity magazines that you owned in California prior to January 1, 2000, is legal provided you are not otherwise prohibited. A person prohibited from possessing firearms is also prohibited from owning or possessing any magazines or ammunition.
  
  (Pen. Code, §§16150, subd. (b), 30305, 32310.)

Since magazines usually have no serial number, and there was no requirement for record keeping on the sale of magazines, it is impossible to tell how old a magazine is, or when it was bought.

So you know when they bought those magazines poodle?
What a loser.....

 

[Pop23]

Like i said before, that's one ridiculous asshole. Are there more?

Hundreds of Thousands and Millions of us, all across the country. Many in the Law Enforcement and Military communities.

Millions that would go on a shooting spree if a law they didnt agree with was passed?

I find it amusing....

Most Americans if asked what they would do if the government came to take their house would reply .......get a lawyer, call my congressman, go to the press.....peaceful protest

If you ask gun nuts what they would do if someone tried to take their gun......I'd kill em

Because it's stupid.

See what would happen if the government tried to take everyone's home.

I think the answer would be a lot different.

Idiot.

 

[BULLDOG]

Yes. It was on the news again this morning.

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

Frequently Asked Questions | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General
Are large-capacity magazines legal?

• 
  Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California. However, continued possession of large-capacity magazines that you owned in California prior to January 1, 2000, is legal provided you are not otherwise prohibited. A person prohibited from possessing firearms is also prohibited from owning or possessing any magazines or ammunition.
  
  (Pen. Code, §§16150, subd. (b), 30305, 32310.)

Since magazines usually have no serial number, and there was no requirement for record keeping on the sale of magazines, it is impossible to tell how old a magazine is, or when it was bought.

So you know when they bought those magazines poodle?
What a loser.....

That's kinda the point. No one knows when he bought the magazines, and without that, you can't say they were illegal.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What...the two links I gave you weren't enough proof that they used high capacity magazines?
Run away little man,run away....

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

Frequently Asked Questions | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General
Are large-capacity magazines legal?

• 
  Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California. However, continued possession of large-capacity magazines that you owned in California prior to January 1, 2000, is legal provided you are not otherwise prohibited. A person prohibited from possessing firearms is also prohibited from owning or possessing any magazines or ammunition.
  
  (Pen. Code, §§16150, subd. (b), 30305, 32310.)

Since magazines usually have no serial number, and there was no requirement for record keeping on the sale of magazines, it is impossible to tell how old a magazine is, or when it was bought.

So you know when they bought those magazines poodle?
What a loser.....

That's kinda the point. No one knows when he bought the magazines, and without that, you can't say they were illegal.

Still going for the dodge I see...

 

[BULLDOG]

Existing high capacity magazines were grandfathered in when they passed that bill.

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

Frequently Asked Questions | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General
Are large-capacity magazines legal?

• 
  Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California. However, continued possession of large-capacity magazines that you owned in California prior to January 1, 2000, is legal provided you are not otherwise prohibited. A person prohibited from possessing firearms is also prohibited from owning or possessing any magazines or ammunition.
  
  (Pen. Code, §§16150, subd. (b), 30305, 32310.)

Since magazines usually have no serial number, and there was no requirement for record keeping on the sale of magazines, it is impossible to tell how old a magazine is, or when it was bought.

So you know when they bought those magazines poodle?
What a loser.....

That's kinda the point. No one knows when he bought the magazines, and without that, you can't say they were illegal.

Still going for the dodge I see...

Still going for facts. Do you know for a fact when he got the magazines?

 

[ogibillm]

If I owned one, and uniformed officers showed up, knew I owned one and demanded it, yes. Cops aren't my enemies. But short of them standing there hands out waiting, I'd try and come up with an alternative. Claim it was stolen, file a false report n everything.

I AM a gun owner, and have great respect for LEOs. However, ANY LEO who shows up at my home with the intent of unConstitutional actions may as well be wearing the Soviet hammer and sickle on their badges and will be treated as such.

That's the thing... for this scenario to be remotely plausible an outright repeal or at least massive modification of the 2nd amendment would have to be passed.

So the question should be would you surrender your guns in a legal collection or would you choose to break the law?

Again, it's a stupid question.

There would be enough people that would not that the carnage would be so great that every police officer would resign or back the publics right to ownership.

And if you think the military would get involved you are equally lacking reality.

The military would have the White House surrounded so fast it would make your head spin.

no, see, you're still living in a fantasy world. whatever you think of the likelihood that the 2nd amendment being abolished the likelihood of a military coup is far more remote.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What a load of horse shit!!!
You're sounding more pathetic by the post.

Frequently Asked Questions | State of California - Department of Justice - Kamala D. Harris Attorney General
Are large-capacity magazines legal?

• 
  Generally, it is illegal to buy, manufacture, import, keep for sale, expose for sale, give or lend any large-capacity magazine (able to accept more than 10 rounds) in California. However, continued possession of large-capacity magazines that you owned in California prior to January 1, 2000, is legal provided you are not otherwise prohibited. A person prohibited from possessing firearms is also prohibited from owning or possessing any magazines or ammunition.
  
  (Pen. Code, §§16150, subd. (b), 30305, 32310.)

Since magazines usually have no serial number, and there was no requirement for record keeping on the sale of magazines, it is impossible to tell how old a magazine is, or when it was bought.

So you know when they bought those magazines poodle?
What a loser.....

That's kinda the point. No one knows when he bought the magazines, and without that, you can't say they were illegal.

Still going for the dodge I see...

Still going for facts. Do you know for a fact when he got the magazines?

Do I really need to burn your dumbass again?
"The suspects used two different brands of AR-15, one made by Smith & Wesson, and the other by a smaller manufacturer called DPMS, both of which were reportedly purchased by a third party. The Smith & Wesson rifle was modified in an attempt to make it fully automatic, and the DPMS rifle had been changed to quickly accept and release magazines. California bans the most common versions of the AR-15, which come with detachable magazines that allow for quick reloading with the touch of a button. To get around that law, many companies — including both Smith & Wesson and DPMS — make “California compliant” models with fixed magazines that can’t be released from the body of the gun with the press of a button. Often with these California models, shooters must open up the gun’s receiver and reload rounds one by one."

I got more...or your dumbass could do a search on your own.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Here's some more for you poodle...

"The Wall Street Journal confirmed this hunch: one of the rifles had been altered to quickly release and accept magazines, which is illegal under California law. Investigators also found evidence that one of the rifles had been changed with the intent of making it fully automatic, a practice banned under federal law."